Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes comparison

Microsoft and Red Hat are both solutions in the Container Security category. Microsoft is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.1, while Red Hat is ranked #20 with an average rating of 8.1. Microsoft holds a 7.4% mindshare in Container Security, compared to Red Hat’s 2.3% mindshare. Additionally, 94% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 5, 2025

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and Microsoft Defender for Cloud compete in the cloud security market. Microsoft Defender seems to have the upper hand with its comprehensive features, despite Red Hat's advantages in pricing and support.

Features: Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security deeply integrates with Kubernetes, enhancing container security. It simplifies configurations through native tools and offers dedicated threat scanning for Kubernetes workloads. Microsoft Defender for Cloud delivers extensive threat protection across hybrid environments, advanced analytics for incident detection, and integration with Azure Sentinel for enhanced insights.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Red Hat facilitates smooth Kubernetes deployment and provides responsive customer support. Its setup is straightforward, appealing to users seeking simplicity. Microsoft Defender benefits from integration with Azure, which can streamline processes for existing Microsoft users but may be more challenging to deploy because of its broader coverage. Its customer service matches professional enterprise-level expectations.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security offers lower initial costs, showing considerable ROI for Kubernetes-focused users prioritizing cost efficiency. Microsoft Defender for Cloud comes with higher setup expenses but delivers substantial ROI due to its expansive features, making it cost-effective for businesses needing widespread protection.

To learn more, read our detailed Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 838,713 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 2.0%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 7.4%, down from 8.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is 2.3%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Container Security

Featured Reviews

Andrew W

VP - Information Technology at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees

Tells us about vulnerabilities as well as their impact and helps to focus on real issues

Looking at all the different pieces, it has got everything we need. Some of the pieces we do not even use. For example, we do not have Kubernetes Security. We are not running any K8 clusters, so it is good for us. Overall, we find the solution to be fantastic. There can be additional education components. This may not be truly fair to them because of what the product is going for, but it would be great to see additional education for compliance. It is not a criticism of the tool per se, but anything to help non-development resources understand some of the complexities of the cloud is always appreciated. Any additional educational resources are always helpful for security teams, especially those without a development background.

Read full review

Vibhor Goel

Senior Cloud Platform Engineer at Deutsche Börse

A single tool for complete visibility and addressing security gaps

Currently, issues are structured in Microsoft Defender for Cloud at severity levels of high, critical, or warning, but these severity levels are not always right. For example, Microsoft might consider a port being open as critical, but that might not be the case for our company. Similarly, it might suggest closing some management ports, but you might need them to be able to log in, so the severity levels for certain things can be improved. Even though Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides a way to temporarily disable certain alerts or notifications without affecting our security score, it would be better to have more granularized control over these recommendations. Currently, we cannot even disable certain alerts or notifications. There should be an automated mechanism to design Azure policies based on the recommendations, possibly with AI integration. Instead of an engineer having to write a policy to fix security gaps, which is very time-consuming, there should be an inbuilt capability to auto-remediate everything and have proper control in place. Additionally, enabling Defender for Cloud at the resource group level, rather than only at the subscription level, would be beneficial.

Read full review

Daniel Stevens

Software Engineer at Galley

Offers easy management and container connection with HTTPS, but the support needs to improve

I have experience with the solution's setup in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and our company has assisted in the development of a cluster in a research department, but we didn't start from scratch because we have IT professionals who have installed Kubernetes across 12 nodes of a cluster and a new environment can be created for a new platform. I also had another setup experience of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes in Portugal where I had to implement the solution in a cluster of 22 computer servers, which was completed with assistance from the IT department of the company. The initial setup process of the solution can be considered as difficult. The setup process involves using the permissions, subnets and range of IPs, which makes it complex. Deploying Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes takes around eight to ten hours for new clusters. The solution's deployment can be divided into three parts. The first part involves OpenStack, where the cluster's resources need to be identified. The second part involves virtualizing assets and identifying other physical assets, for which OpenStack, Kubernetes, or OpenShift are used. The third part of the deployment involves dividing the networks into subnetworks and implementing automation to deploy the microservices using Helm. The number of professionals required for the solution's deployment depends upon the presence of automated scripts. Ideally, two or three professionals are required to set up Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"As a frequently audited company, we value PingSafe's compliance monitoring features. They give us a report with a compliance score for how well we meet certain regulatory standards, like HIPAA. We can show our compliance as a percentage. It's also a way to show that we are serious about security."

"The most valuable features of PingSafe are the asset inventory and issue indexing."

"The visibility is the best part of the solution."

"Our previous product took a lot of man hours to manage. Once we got Singularity Cloud Workload Security, it freed up our time to work on other tasks."

"Cloud Native Security's evidence-based reporting allows us to prioritize issues by understanding their impact, helping us resolve the most important problems first."

"The remediation process is good."

"SentinelOne is far superior to our previous solution, Accops, due to its seamless updates, effortless maintenance, and user-friendly interface and dashboard."

"The most valuable aspect of Singularity Cloud Security is its unified dashboard."

More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security pros

"Using Security Center, you have a full view, at any given time, of what's deployed, and that is something that is very useful."

"Microsoft Defender for Cloud has significantly enhanced our overall security posture by approximately 20 to 25 percent."

"It has seamless integration with any of the services I mentioned, on Azure, such as IaaS platforms, virtual machines, applications, or databases, because it's an in-house product from Microsoft within the Azure ecosystem."

"Threat protection is comprehensive and simple."

"One important security feature is the incident alerts. Now, with all these cyberattacks, there are a lot of incident alerts that get triggered. It is very difficult to keep monitoring everything automatically, instead our organization is utilizing the automated use case that we get from Microsoft. That has helped bring down the manual work for a lot of things."

"The most valuable feature for me is the variety of APIs available."

"Technical support is helpful."

"The solution is up-to-date with the latest updates and identified threats."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud pros

"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."

"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."

"I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security."

"The benefit of working with the solution is the fact that it's very straightforward...It is a perfectly stable product since the details are very accurate."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."

"One of the most valuable features I found was the ability of this solution to map the network and show you the communication between your containers and your different nodes."

"The most beneficial security feature of the product revolves around the areas of vulnerability and configuration."

"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."

More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes pros

Cons

"We are getting reports only in a predefined form. I would like to have customized reports so that I can see how many issues are open or closed today or in two weeks."

"The recommended actions aren't always specific, so it might suggest recommendations that don't apply to the particular infrastructure code I'm reviewing."

"If I had to pick a complaint, it would be the way the hosts are listed in the tool. You have different columns separated by endpoint name, Cloud Account, and Cloud Instances ID. I wish there was something where we could change the endpoint name and not use just the IP address. We would like to have custom names or our own names for the instances. If I had a complaint, that would be it, but so far, it meets all the needs that we have."

"The cloud-based operations might pose challenges in areas with limited or unavailable internet connectivity. Desktop features might be useful for smaller organizations with less complex security needs."

"Customized queries should be made easier to improve PingSafe."

"The main area for improvement I want to see is for the platform to become less resource-intensive. Right now, it can slow down processes on the machine, and it would be a massive improvement if it were more lightweight than it currently is."

"Currently, we would have to export our vulnerability report to an .xlsx file, and review it in an Excel spreadsheet, and then we sort of compile a list from there. It would be cool if there was a way to actually toggle multiple applications for review and then see those file paths on multiple users rather than only one user at a time or only one application at a time."

"While SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security offers robust protection, its cost could be a barrier for some users."

More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security cons

"One of the main challenges that we have been facing with Azure Security Center is the cost. The costs are really a complex calculation, e.g., to calculate the monthly costs. Azure is calculating on an hourly basis for use of the resource. Because of this, we found it really complex to promote what will be our costs for the next couple of months. I think if Azure could reduce the complex calculation and come up with straightforward cost mapping that would be very useful from a product point of view."

"Integration into other third-party products, particularly those from tier three vendors like ManageEngine and Hexcode, has proven difficult."

"The solution is quite complex. A lot of the different policies that actually get applied don't pertain to every client. If you need to have something open for a client application to work, then you get dinged for having a port open or having an older version of TLS available."

"When you work with it, the only problem that we're struggling with is that we have 21 different subscriptions we're trying to apply security to. It's impossible to keep everything organized."

"I would suggest building a single product that addresses endpoint server protection, attack surface, and everything else in one solution. That is the main disadvantage with the product. If we are incorporating some features, we end up in a situation where this solution is for the server, and that one is for the client, or this is for identity, and that is for our application. They're not bundling it. Commercially, we can charge for different licenses, but on the implementation side, it's tough to help our end-customer understand which product they're getting."

"It's hard to reach someone who understands my problems. I haven't had many issues, so I haven't called them."

"The vulnerabilities are duplicated many times."

"Sometimes it's very difficult to determine when I need Microsoft Defender for Cloud for a special resource group or a special kind of product."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud cons

"The tool's command line and configuration are hard for us to understand and make deployment complex. It should also include zero trust, access control features and database connectivity."

"The solution's price could be better."

"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."

"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."

"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."

"The support and specifications need to be up to date for the cluster technologies"

"The solution lacks features when compared to some of the competitors such as Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and has room for improvement."

"The testing process could be improved."

More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"SentinelOne offers excellent pricing and licensing options."

"PingSafe is cost-effective for the amount of infrastructure we have. It's reasonable for what they offer compared to our previous solution. It's at least 25 percent to 30 percent less."

"I am not involved in the pricing, but it is cost-effective."

"Its pricing was a little less than other providers."

"It is not that expensive. There are some tools that are double the cost of PingSafe. It is good on the pricing side."

"The tool is cost-effective."

"PingSafe is not very expensive compared to Prisma Cloud, but it's also not that cheap. However, because of its features, it makes sense to us as a company. It's fairly priced."

"The pricing is fair. It is not inexpensive, and it is also not expensive. When managing a large organization, it is going to be costly, but it meets the business needs. In terms of what is out there on the market, it is fair and comparable to what I have seen, so I do not have any complaints about the cost"

More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security pricing and cost advice

"The licensing cost per server is $15 per month."

"Security Center charges $15 per resource for any workload that you onboard into it. They charge per VM or per data-base server or per application. It's not like Microsoft 365 licensing, where there are levels like E3 and E5. Security Center is pretty straightforward."

"Currently, Microsoft offers only one plan at the enterprise level which is $15 per machine."

"There is a helpful cost-reducing option that allows you to integrate production subscriptions with non-production subscriptions."

"The tool is pretty expensive."

"This is a worldwide service and depending on the country, there will be different prices."

"There are improvements that have to be made to the licensing. Currently, for servers, it has to be done by grouping the servers on a single subscription... We don't have an option whereby, if all those resources are in one subscription, we can have each of the individual servers subject to different planning."

"I am not involved much with the pricing but the bundle offering is good."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud pricing and cost advice

"The price of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is better than Palo Alto Prisma."

"The pricing model is moderate, meaning it is not very expensive."

"We purchase a yearly basis license for the solution."

"Red Hat offers two pricing options for their solution: a separate price, and a bundled price under the OpenShift Platform Plus."

"It's a costly solution"

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

25%

Computer Software Company

15%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about PingSafe?

The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best featu...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingSafe?

SentinelOne is relatively cheap. If ten is the most expensive, I would rate it a seven.

See all answers

What needs improvement with PingSafe?

From my personal experience, the alerting system needs to be faster. If something happens in our infrastructure, the ...

See all answers

How is Prisma Cloud vs Azure Security Center for security?

Azure Security Center is very easy to use, integrates well, and gives very good visibility on what is happening acros...

See all answers

What do you like most about Microsoft Defender for Cloud?

The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Defender for Cloud?

The licensing is straightforward but can become expensive if you cover everything. You must balance the cost against ...

See all answers

What do you like most about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?

I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the b...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?

From an improvement perspective, I would like to create new policies in the tool, especially if it is deployed for th...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?

I use the solution in my company for vulnerability management, configuration management, compliance, safety handling,...

See all answers

Comparisons

Wiz vs SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security

Compared 25% of the time

Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security

Compared 22% of the time

AWS GuardDuty vs SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security

Compared 8% of the time

Orca Security vs SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security

Compared 6% of the time

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security

Compared 5% of the time

More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Competitors

AWS GuardDuty vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Compared 21% of the time

Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Compared 12% of the time

Wiz vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Compared 11% of the time

Microsoft Defender XDR vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Compared 4% of the time

Orca Security vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Compared 3% of the time

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Competitors

Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

Compared 26% of the time

SUSE NeuVector vs Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

Compared 14% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security vs Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

Compared 12% of the time

Aqua Cloud Security Platform vs Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

Compared 12% of the time

Tenable.io Container Security vs Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

Compared 4% of the time

More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security

January 2025

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security report

Download SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Cloud

February 2025

Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

February 2025

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes report

Download Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes product report

Also Known As

PingSafe

Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender

StackRox

Interactive Demo

Demo not available

SentinelOne

Microsoft

Demo not available

Red Hat

Overview

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security protects cloud workloads, offering advanced threat detection and automated response. It integrates seamlessly with cloud environments and secures containerized applications and virtual machines against vulnerabilities.

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is renowned for its efficiency in mitigating threats in real-time. The platform integrates effortlessly with existing cloud environments, ensuring robust cloud security management with minimal manual intervention. Securing containerized applications and virtual machines, it excels in threat intelligence and endpoint protection. However, improvements are needed in performance during high workload periods, and more integrations with third-party tools and better documentation would be beneficial. Users often find the installation process complex, support response times slow, and the dashboard's navigation unintuitive.

What are the key features of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security?

Real-time Threat Detection: Identifies and mitigates threats as they occur.
Automated Response: Automatically responds to threats to minimize impact.
Ease of Deployment: Simple setup process with scalable options.
Machine Learning Insights: AI-driven insights enhance threat prevention.
Seamless Integration: Integrates with cloud environments for unified security management.

What are the primary benefits or ROI to expect from SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security?

Enhanced Threat Mitigation: Improved security against real-time threats.
Reduced Manual Intervention: Automated processes save time and resources.
Scalability: Easily adapts to growing security requirements.
Centralized Management: Manage security across platforms from a single console.
Advanced Threat Intelligence: Provides in-depth analysis and protection.

In specific industries, SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is implemented to safeguard critical data and infrastructure. Organizations in finance, healthcare, and technology depend on its real-time threat detection and automated response to protect sensitive information. Its ability to secure containerized applications and virtual machines is particularly valuable in dynamic environments where rapid scaling is necessary.

SentinelOne

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is a comprehensive security solution that provides advanced threat protection for cloud workloads. It offers real-time visibility into the security posture of cloud environments, enabling organizations to quickly identify and respond to potential threats. With its advanced machine learning capabilities, Microsoft Defender for Cloud can detect and block sophisticated attacks, including zero-day exploits and fileless malware.

The solution also provides automated remediation capabilities, allowing security teams to quickly and easily respond to security incidents. With Microsoft Defender for Cloud, organizations can ensure the security and compliance of their cloud workloads, while reducing the burden on their security teams.

Microsoft

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is a Kubernetes-native container security solution that enables your organization to more securely build, deploy, and run cloud-native applications from anywhere. With its built-in security across the entire software development life cycle, you can lower your operational costs, reduce operational risk, and increase developer productivity while improving your security posture immediately. In addition, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security integrates with security tools and DevOps in an effort to help you mitigate threats and enforce security policies that minimize operational risk to your applications. It also enables you to provide developers with actionable, context-rich guidelines integrated into existing workflows, along with tooling to support developer productivity. The solution is suitable for small, medium, and large-sized companies.

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Features

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes has many valuable key features. Some of the most useful ones include:

Vulnerability management: With the Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes solution, you gain full visibility into your entire cloud-native landscape. The solution makes it possible for your organization to identify and remediate vulnerabilities in Kubernetes configurations and container images, as well as running applications. It also enables you to provide developers with clear and prioritized guidance on fixable vulnerabilities.

Configuration management: The solution makes configuration management easy. To identify missed best practices, you can understand how images, containers, and deployments are configured prior to running. It also allows you to leverage Kubernetes-native capabilities - like admission controllers - to prevent misconfigured workloads from deploying or running.

Compliance: Using Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes helps you manage compliance with standard-specific checks across CIS Benchmarks, NIST, PCI, and HIPAA, with more than 300 controls and continuous compliance assessments and one-click audit reporting.

Network segmentation: The solution enables you to enforce network policies by using the native capabilities in Kubernetes. You can simulate new policies, visualize existing ones, generate updated YAML files, and apply them directly to Kubernetes.

Multifactor risk profiling: With Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, you can use risk rankings by combining vulnerability (CVE) details with rich Kubernetes context and artifact data. This allows you to assess and prioritize risk across your entire environment. In turn, you can accelerate remediation times and productivity.

Threat detection and incident response: By combining custom policies, process allow lists, application and network baselines, and behavioral modeling to identify anomalous behavior, the solution enables you to protect your applications at runtime. You can then leverage Kubernetes-native enforcement capabilities to respond.

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Benefits

There are many benefits to implementing Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes. Some of the biggest advantages the solution offers include:

Increases protection, scalability, and portability.
Eliminates blind spots.
Reduces time and costs.
Reduces the effort needed to implement security.
Streamlines security analysis, investigation, and remediation by using the rich context Kubernetes provides.
Provides scalability and resiliency native to Kubernetes

Reviews from Real Users

PeerSpot user Igor K., Owner/Full Stack Software Engineer at Maraphonic, Inc., says, “The solution allows teams to create their own virtual spaces and share resources. The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources.”

Red Hat

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.

City National Bank, U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

January 2025

Free Report: Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes report.

See our list of best Container Security vendors.

We monitor all Container Security reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.